If you missed my talk at Northwestern on the Friend Zone, and most of you did, I go over a lot of what I said in it in my interview with Amanda Marcotte here. My segment of the podcast starts about 8 minutes in. (The rest of the podcast is interesting, too.)
The one thing missing from the podcast that my talk had was … a gazillion terrible Friend Zone memes to illustrate all my points. So here are a couple of the ones I refer to in the interview.
katz – squeeee!
racnad’s a lying little shit, pretending he doesn’t know what a soft no is, pretending it’s just women lyyyyiiiiinnnnnng to him. Yeah, fuckshite, because when we do say no we risk anything from verbal abuse to murder. Men know perfectly well what a soft no is and accept it in situations that aren’t about their boners. As has been pointed out many times, it’s not that they don’t understand, or are confused: they know, all right, but don’t like the answer.
I daresay I’m repeating what people have already said upthread, but I’m feeling lazy and disinclined to read the little gobshite’s walls of sadbonertext.
racnad: You don’t need to because I never said or implied that anyone owes anyone else sex or a romantic relationship.
But you have said women owe men advice on how to get laid, because that’s a win-win. Dudes get laid and women don’t get harassed.
So the things you are saying are equivalent are… not getting laid/being harassed.
So because women don’t go out of their way to see to it that men who make them uncomfortable get laid, they should expect to be harassed. You are making it women’s fault that men harass them.
You are saying men who harass women deserve to have those women teach them how to not harass women. You are going, “yes but” and putting it all on the women.
Men need accept that women can say no. They can say no in any way they like. If men take that no at face value, they will have better lives. They will even get laid.
Trust me on this. How do I know it? Personal experience. I have gotten laid, more than once. I have also (in my callow youth) pined after women who weren’t really interested in me. It’s happened that by not getting an unambiguous yes (and not making my wishes completely clear; from not wanting to look like a creep, in a situation where creeping was far to easy to do by inadvertence [we were showering together on a regular basis]) I missed out on a relationship when we were both interested.
On balance, I’m cool with that. Better to have missed that chance than to have ruined a fine friendship by creeping.
And that’s the thing. Friendship is harder to get than sex. If someone is actually putting you in the category “Friend” when they aren’t interested in fucking… you WIN! You got the big prize. Because sex is easy to come by (for people who aren’t creeps; who don’t make apologies for abusers. For people who respect other people’s boundaries and don’t try to force them into some strange mold. Based on the things you’ve done here, it doesn’t surprise me if you have a hard time getting laid), but friends are rare.
Friends are to be treasured more than fucks. Yeah, that “perfect” romance is great (because it couples fucking and friendship), but that’s a couple of times in your life sort of deal. Most sexytimes are just that, a pleasant interlude in the rest of your life.
Friends… those are fucking precious.
And “friendzone” bullshit trivialises both sex, and friendship.
Regarding the studies that the troll demanded on why women use soft ‘no’s, I have something that might be of interest (not that it will make any dents in rancid’s wall of purposeful obtuseness, but others might find it interesting):
http://das.sagepub.com/content/10/3/293.abstract
http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2011/03/21/mythcommunication-its-not-that-they-dont-understand-they-just-dont-like-the-answer/
These are links about a study called “Just Say No? The Use of Conversation Analysis In Developing A Feminist Perspective On Sexual Refusal”. It’s a study that looked at people’s abilities to pick up on indirect ‘no’s in everyday life, and then in sexual situations. And guess what? Dudes (and women as well) were totally able to pick up on ‘no’s couched in “Well, I’d love to, but…” or “Well, I’m pretty busy, but we’ll see” when it came down to situations involving, say, invitations to church picnics or other platonic offers.
It was only when it came down to sexual situations like dating that their ability to extrapolate magically vanished and the exact same language magically became some kind of enigmatic woman-code that they didn’t interpret as a ‘no’. Almost as if it was to their advantage to press the boundaries and violate the soft ‘no’s. Can’t imagine why that would be.
So,no. It’s not the fault of the women because this language is used freaking everywhere, it’s the fault of entitled dudebros who don’t want to hear or accept a ‘no’.
Hmm, wordpress borked my links. One second let me try again.
http://das.sagepub.com/content/10/3/293.abstract
http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2011/03/21/mythcommunication-its-not-that-they-dont-understand-they-just-dont-like-the-answer/
Catalpa – that’s just the article I was thinking about; thanks for doing the links! (Yes, I’m being very lazy this evening.)
Ninja’d by Catalpa – I’ve actually got that piece open on another tab. Just as well I read everything before using it.
For those who don’t use the link, here’s the takeway …
Or, in simpler language – pull the other one, lads, it has bells on.
@Katz sooo cute although there is an element of “How could you do land me with this idiot?” to kitty’s expression 😉
“Just ‘cos I’m lying in the mutt’s bed is no excuse for it to think we’re friends!”
Oh wow. He really dug his heels in, didn’t he? Yeah. Actually, the more he posts the more I think he should stay away from women who aren’t blood relatives.
I wouldn’t want to deal with him. He kept talking about how a “soft no” is just so damn disrespectful, and why would a woman do that, and women get what they deserve when they’re harassed. Oh, a P.S., ladies, pretend you’re my mommy for a while and feel sorry for me. Then later — women like abusers!
Better work on yourself, dude. You didn’t listen to one word anyone here had to say. And since you’re so into tone, you should know that your hostility is apparent and your expectations are silly.
Catapala,
Thank you for the interesting links. However, they address immediate situations where a woman doesn’t want to have sex, not the meanings of the words for potential future events. When someone says “I have to work in the morning,” it is clear they don’t want to have sex that night. It does not on it’s face mean “I don’t want to sleep with you ever.” In fact a women who says this may in fact have to work in the morning and wish to sleep with him on a future non-work-night, or maybe not. Is this an unreasonable interpretation?
But the example I gave was “That sounds fun but I’m busy this weekend, maybe some other time.” People on this board have said I was wrong for interpreting this as “maybe some other time,” rather than “I’m not attracted to you and never want to go out.” Do you think interpreting “maybe some other time” as meaning “maybe some other time” is unreasonable?
rancad: re the link Catapala gave you. Dude, you are doing exactly what the link talks about. You know that when someone whom you aren’t hoping to fuck says, “I’m busy” they mean a polite no. You know that if it happens on a regular basis they really don’t want to spend time with you.
You pretend that you having put the target of your lusts into the girlfriend zone changes things. In short.:
You also ignored a whole lot of other people telling you things (like how to not be a creep, which you used to pretend was A Big Thing). I can only assume you didn’t want to hear those answers any more than you want to admit you hear “no” when a woman says, “I’m busy”.
Because this isn’t about s immediate situations where a woman doesn’t want to have sex, it’s about people engaging in a complex social interaction and you not wanting to hear it, because, “It does not on it’s face mean “I don’t want to sleep with you ever,” which is exactly what I was talking about when I said, If a clerk asks someone if they need help and they say, “not now”, we accept that this is a polite “no” and no one gets bent about it; but when a woman says, “not right now”, the poor menz go, “ok, WHEN!”.
It’s telling that you have let slip the idea that, “want to go do something” means a woman has to tell you, “I don’t want to have sex with you ever” to avoid the implicit accusation that she’s somehow being unfair by not giving you that, firm, definite, polite; so as not to your your delicate feelings, “no” you say you want.
The no you refuse to hear unless… I don’t know. After all she only said she didn’t want to get coffee, maybe she wants dinner, or a day at Rockaway Beach. She didn’t say a blowjob was out of the question…
Which is what makes someone creepy. It’s the refusal to treat the targets of your lusts as people. It’s the different set of criteria when Mr, Happy Pants is standing up. It’s being an entitled shit, and that what you feel entitled to is another person’s time/interest/body.
And you get it. I am sure you get it. But you couch your demands as “but what if she really means”, and “She didn’t make it clear” and other obfuscutory bullshit, so you can try to harass her into going out with you, “just once”. After that the next step in the process of wearing down her ability to resist the demands for sex.
You will, of course, accuse me of putting words in your mouth, and say that you would never do such a thing. Your admissions here, and your persistent pretense that people aren’t clear, and your demands that women cater to your boner give you the lie.
You, sir, are a creep.
racnad: Do you think interpreting “maybe some other time” as meaning “maybe some other time” is unreasonable?
Asked and answered, but (as you seem to be possessed of a mean, and limited, intellect) I will repeat myself.
Not if it only happens once. If it persists, then yes.
Simple, no? You treat it the way you would if you were talking to someone you don’t want to bone. Oddly, that was the advice given you about how to not be a creep too. But you don’t want to hear it.
I wonder why that is.*
*Ok, I don’t wonder. I think it’s because you are a creep.
Oh. and racnad… you asked why women might choose to tell what you castigated as “white lies”: Gunman may have been upset about, “women who rebuffed him.
Yeah… maybe they have a reason.
Pecunium,
You have a non-hostile thoughtful response, so I will address your points:
“racnad: You don’t need to because I never said or implied that anyone owes anyone else sex or a romantic relationship.
But you have said women owe men advice on how to get laid, because that’s a win-win. Dudes get laid and women don’t get harassed.”
For the umpteenth time, no one should have sex or a relationship with anyone they don’t want sex or a relationship with. I suggested offering advice but that’s not the same thing as suggested they date or sleep with someone they don’t like.
There are plenty of dating advice blogs out there, but most of them aimed “nice guys” who perceive a friendzone are the ones know as the seduction community or PUAs. That would open another can of worms here because many of them (thought not all) are misogynist. And the worst ones are really awful and disrespectful toward women. So I’d thought I’d plant a suggestion for someone to write “A Feminists Guide to Building Successful Healthy Respectful Romantic Relationships with Women without being Creepy.” After all, if someone feels repeatedly friendzoned, it’s obvious they’re doing it wrong, and the PUAs are the only ones trying to teach them to do it right (to be clear the PUAs teaching misogynist and predatory approaches are NOT doing it right).
I did NOT say that it is the responsibility of any specific person here. But if someone did right the book and it worked there would both the men who read it and their girlfriends would not be complaining. That’s the win-win.
“So the things you are saying are equivalent are… not getting laid/being harassed.”
No, other then neither of them being fun they are not equivalent.
“So because women don’t go out of their way to see to it that men who make them uncomfortable get laid, they should expect to be harassed. You are making it women’s fault that men harass them.
You are saying men who harass women deserve to have those women teach them how to not harass women. You are going, “yes but” and putting it all on the women.”
No one deserves to be harassed, and when it happens it’s the harassers fault. It’s not my job to do volunteer work in my community either, but it does make the community a better place. Why do people on this blog read things into my words I’m not saying? It feels like a manipulative tool to stifle dissent.
“Men need accept that women can say no.”
I agree and I never said otherwise.
“They can say no in any way they like. If men take that no at face value, they will have better lives. They will even get laid.”
The example I gave “That sounds like fun but I’m busy this weekend. Maybe some other time” is not “no at face value.” At face value it is an invitation to ask for a date at some time in the future. I was criticized for not taking this at face value. I can’t believe commenters on this blog have said my expectation for open and honest communication is unreasonable.
“Trust me on this. How do I know it? Personal experience. I have gotten laid, more than once. I have also (in my callow youth) pined after women who weren’t really interested in me. It’s happened that by not getting an unambiguous yes (and not making my wishes completely clear; from not wanting to look like a creep, in a situation where creeping was far to easy to do by inadvertence [we were showering together on a regular basis]) I missed out on a relationship when we were both interested.
On balance, I’m cool with that. Better to have missed that chance than to have ruined a fine friendship by creeping.”
So you missed out on what might have been a good relationship out of fear of looking like a creep. Would expressing your desire to be more than friends in a way that respects her boundaries have been creepy? Why should creepiness be a risk when doing that?
“And that’s the thing. Friendship is harder to get than sex. If someone is actually putting you in the category “Friend” when they aren’t interested in fucking… you WIN! You got the big prize. Because sex is easy to come by”
Most guys would disagree. Men who are found attractive by a large number of women find sex easy to come by, most men don’t. BTW, I’m not pushing the “women can have sex whenever they want” line. Maybe they can get sex from guys they don’t want, but that’s no blessing. Good relationships are just as difficult for women as they are for men.
…I…really?
racnad, did you really just respond to an article that states that men are perfectly capable of understanding a “soft no” but chose to interpret it as something else when it comes from women with: “but I can still interpret it as not meaning no, right?” Did you really just do that?
Look, this has all been explained to you already. When a woman says, “Tht sounds fun but I’m busy this weekend, maybe some other time,” that is a “soft no.” That means never. It is understood as “never.” And even if you didn’t know that meant “never,” you have been told repeatedly that it does, and you know now. You have been told why women use “soft no’s” when rejecting advances from men: socialization to protect other’s feelings and fear of verbal abuse or physical violence from men. You have been given multiple examples of the latter. All this has explained to you. And yet you stil do not to get it.
At this point, it’s you choosing not to listen. At this point, you are choosing not hear the message and to interpret it in a way that is going to serve your own needs. You are either so dense that you are on danger of collapsing on on yourself and forming some kind of black hole, or you are outright trolling and not here in good faith.
My money’s on that last option.
The same straw feminists he’s been arguing with this whole time, instead of listening to anyone here.
Katz, I love Frenchies. Thanks for posting that!
Why do you think you’re entitled to a non-hostile response? You’ve been appallingly rude from your first comment, yet the rest of us are supposed to be nice and kind and meek? Is that because we’re mostly women, or do you expect that from men as well?
A few people have linked stories about women who were victims of violence after rejecting men.
To be clear, violence against women is a horrible crime that is never justified for any reason and the perpetrators should go to jail for a long time.
That said, these stories don’t describe if the rejections were clear and unambiguous, or “soft” which on their face imply the possibility of romance in the future.
Therefore these links don’t have enough information to conclude if safety concerns justify women giving rejecting men with ambiguous white lies rather than clear messages.
If a sales clerk offers to help me and I say “not now,” that doesn’t mean I won’t want help in the future. If I said “now now” and was asked again 5 minutes later, I wouldn’t judge the clerk to be a creep.
…So, men violently hurting women after being rejected has lead you to conclude that women’s safety concerns aren’t justified?
Do you even read what you type?
“Why do you think you’re entitled to a non-hostile response? You’ve been appallingly rude from your first comment, yet the rest of us are supposed to be nice and kind and meek? Is that because we’re mostly women, or do you expect that from men as well?”
I expect a non-hostile response because it is common courtesy, which I expect from men as well. You know what, I agree with feminists on 80 percent of issues but because I question some things feminists say, Instead I’ve gotten a lot of my words twisted into things I never said, and have been told to fuck off many times. I’ve debated Tea Party Conservatives and those debates are more civil that what was posted here.
Fascinatingly, we can also apply these socialized soft nos to racnad’s writings.
“Well, of course I’m not blaming abuse victims, but…”
“Well, of course women have the right to say ‘no’, but…”
Sound an awful lot like “Well, [thing that I think you want to hear], but [no, not really]”, don’t they?
“…So, men violently hurting women after being rejected has lead you to conclude that women’s safety concerns aren’t justified?”
Why are people here unable to understand ideas that question there own? Women’s safety concerns are real. There are some messed up dangerous men out there. But there’s no evidence in these stories that white lies are safer than honesty.
Well, you could always leave and go debate the Tea Partiers some more.
Question though, racnad: If a man is not sure about a woman’s soft no, then what’s stopping him from asking for clarification?
…Really? You just answered your own goddamned question: “Women’s safety concerns are real. There are some dangerous men out there.”
There it is. Right there. Women cannot tell who the “dangerous men” are. They do not walk around wearing signs. We cannot tell. So we cannot take a chance. Women act in ways that preserve our safety. This is one of them.
FFS, you’ve had multiple women on this thread tell you this over and over. Why don’t you believe them?
And why can’t you understand this fucking well-known social convention? It’s been explained to you over and over again. Why can’t you grasp this concept? Why is your only concern about women rejecting men? People use these “soft no’s” all the time. Why aren’t you railing against that also? Why do you insist in finding ways to interpret something that is understood, in all others situations as a “no”, as a “yes?”